The Right Non Self-Incrimination and Epistemology of Criminal Witnesses

Zahri Kurniawan; Ilham Wahyudi; H.S. Tisnanta

doi:10.25041/fiatjustisia.v14no4.1988

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v14no4.1988

Abstract

The absence of a clear normative interpretation related to witnesses who are also criminal perpetrators in the Indonesian court has controversy on the theoretical level. In practice, the practitioners adopt a concept known in other countries. However, in adopting ideas from other countries, practitioners are often trapped in practitioners’ paradigms. Translating the perpetrators’ witnesses such as crown witnesses, justice collaborators (JC), and whistleblowers (wb,) are not the concepts comprehensively. In the end, the witness being denied the rights of the perpetrators, namely right non-self-incrimination. The paper offers a concept for finding solutions in the use of witnesses who are also as criminal perpetrators in epistemological basis. These considerations are used to provide a coherent way based on the principle to justify the use of witness evidence from the criminal perpetrators. The purpose is to accord with the principle of due process of law, not to clash the principle of non-self-incrimination in proving the search of material truth.

Keywords:

Witnesses, Evidence, Non-Self Incrimination

References

Adji, Samekto. Pergeseran Pemikiran Hukum dari Era Yunani Menuju Postmodern. Jakarta: Konstitusi Press, 2015.

Alex Stein, Self-Incrimination, Forthcoming in Procedural Law and Economics, in Chris W. Sanchirico, Encyclopedia Of Law And Economics (UK: Cheltenham, UK, Gerrit De Geest: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2011), 5.See also Richard A. Bierschbach & Alex Stein, “Overenforcement”, Georgetown Law Journal 93: 1743-1775, 2005.

Alkostar, Artidjo. “Kebutuhan Responsifitas Perlakuan Hukum Acara Pidana dan Dasar Pertimbangan Pemidanaan serta Judicial Immunity”. Paper in the Supreme Court Rakernas with the Courts of All of Indonesia, Jakarta, September 18-22, (2011).

Anderson, Terence, David Schum, and William Twining. Analysis Of Evidence. Cambridge University Press, Second Edition, Cambridge UK, 2005.

Andrews, John A. Human Right In Criminal Procedure A Comparative Study. Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher, The Hague, 1982.

Atmasasmita, Romli, 2013. Logika Hukum Asas Praduga Tak Bersalah. http://m.tokohindonesia.com/publikasi/article/322-opini/2400-logika-hukum-asas-praduga-tak-bersalah.

Bierschbach, Richard A. & Alex Stein, “Overenforcement”, Georgetown Law Journal 93, (2005): 1743-1775.

Boediarto, Ali. Kompilasi Abstrak Hukum Putusan Mahkamah Agung Tentang Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Ikatan Hakim Indonesia, 2000.

Dann, B. Michael, “The Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: Extorting Physical Evidence from a Suspect”, S. CAL. L. REV 43, (1970): 597-598.

Darmodiharjo, Darjidan Shidarta. Pokok- Pokok Filsafat Hukum: Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 1999.

Farahany, Nita A. “Incriminating Thoughts”, Stanford Law Review 64, (Februari 2012), 1970.

Felishella Earlene and Jesslyn Evelina Tandrajaya, “Sengketa Penguasaan Tanah Antara Warga Kapuk Poglar RT 07 / RW 04 Jakarta Barat Dengan Polda Metro Jaya Ditinjau Dari Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia,” Cepalo 3, no. 2 (November 25, 2019): 55–62, p. 37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25041/cepalo.v3no2.1844.

Firman Saputra. A, “Pelaksanaan Perlindungan Hak Tersangka Dalam Memberikan Keterangan Secara Bebas Pada Tingkat Penyidikan Di Kepolisian Sektor Limapuluh Kota Pekanbaru”, JOM Fakultas Hukum 3, no. 2, (2016):1-15.

Geyh, Charles Gardner. “The Testimonial Component of the Right Against Self-Incrimination”, CATH. U. L. REV 36, (1987): 611-612.

Hall, Livingstone, “Hak Tertuduh Dalam Perkara Pidana,” In the Radio Lecture by Harvard Law School Professors, Compiled by Harold J. Berman, Translated by Gregory Churchill, J. D, Tatanusa, Jakarta, 2008.

Hamzah, Andi. Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2011.

Hamzah, Andi. Pengantar Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia, 1983.

Harahap, Yahya. Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2002.

Hendri, Luis, The United States Bill of Right Significance, dialih bahasa oleh Budi Prayitnodan Abdullah Alamudi, 1995. Pernyataan Hak Asasi Amerika dan Makna Internasional. Jakarta: Dinas Penerangan Amerika Serikat (USIS).

Hiariej, Eddy O. S. “Tetap Dijatuhi Pidana Bilamana Terlibat dalam Kejahatan”. Newsletter Komisi Hukum Nasional 10, no.6 (2010).

Howard Jr, Roscoe C and Lisa A. Rich. “A History of Miranda and Why It Remains Vital Today”. Val. U. L. Rev 40. (2006).

Huijbers, Theo. Filsafat Hukum Dalam Lintas Sejarah. Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 1982.

Indriana, Yayan. “Pengembalian Ganti Rugi Keuangan Negara Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi,” Cepalo 2, no. 2 (September 12, 2019): 115-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25041/cepalo.v2no2.1769.

Itus, Harold H. Persoalan-Persoalan Filsafat. Jakarta Bulan Bintang, Jakarta, 1984.

Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Agung RI, Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung No. 4/2011. Accessed on http://kepaniteraan.mahkamahagung.go.id/peraturan/10-sema/191-sema-no-14-tahun-2010-dokumen-elektronik-sebagai-kelengkapan-berkas-kasasipk-.html

Lubis, M. Sofyan. Prinsip Miranda Rule Hak Tersangka Sebelum Pemeriksaan. Jakarta: Pustaka Yustisia, 2010.

Manan, Bagir dan Susi Dwi Harijati. “Kontitusi dan Hak Asasi Manusia”. Padjajaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 3, no. 3, (2016). DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v3.n3.a1.

Manan, Bagir. Menegakan Hukum Suatu Pencarian. Jakarta: Asosiasi Advokat Indonesia, 2009.

Okky Chahyo Nugroho, “Peran Balai Pemasyarakatan Pada Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak Ditinjau Dalam Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia,” Jurnal HAM 8, no. 2 (December 15, 2017): 161–74. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30641/ham.2017.8.161-174.

Osakwe, Christopher. The Bill Of Right For The Criminal Defendatin In American Law, dalam, Human Right In Criminal Procedure A Comparative Study, Jhon A Andrews, ed. Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher, The Hague, 1982.

Pangaribuan, Luhut M.P. Lay Judges dan Hakim Ad Hoc: Suatu Studi Teoritis Mengenai Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia Fakultas Hukum Pasca Sarjana, 2009.

Pardo, Michael S. “Self-Incrimination and the Epistemology of Testimony”. CARDOZO L. REV 30, (2008).

Reksodiputro, Mardjono, Beberapa catatan tentang Justice Collaborator dan Bentuk Perlindungannya, accessed on http://mardjonoreksodiputro.blogspot.com/2013/11/beberapa-catatan-tentang-justice.html,

Reksodiputro, Mardjono. “Pembocor-rahasia (Whistleblower) dan Penyadapan-rahasia (Wiretapping, Electronic Interception) Dalam Menanggulangi Kejahatan di Indonesia”, Paper on Center for Legislacy, Empowerment, Advocacy and Research (CLEAR) Conference in Hotel Le Meridien. August 3, 2010

Reksodiputro, Mardjono. Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Jakarta: Pusat Pelayanan Keadilan dan Pengabdian Hukum (d/h Lembaga Kriminologi) Universitas Indonesia, 2007.

Rogall, K, Der BeschuldigtealsBeweismittelgegensichselbst. EinBeitragzur Geltung des Satzes ‘Nemotenetur se ipsumprodere’ im Strafverfahren 67 (1977). R. Müller, Neue Ermiltlungsmethoden und das Verbot des Zwangszur Selbstbelastung, 28 EuGRZ546 ,2001.

Rukmini, Mien. Perlindungan Ham Melalui Asas Praduga Tak Bersalah dan Asas Persamaan Kedudukan dalam Hukum pada Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Bandung: Alumni, 2000.

Sanyoto, “Penegakan Hukum Di Indonesia”, Jurnal Dinamika Hukum 8, no. 3, (2008): 99-204.

Sayogie, Frans. “Pemaknaan Saksi dan Keterangan Saksi dalam Teks Hukum Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 65/PUUVIII/2010”. Mimbar Sejarah, Sastra, Budaya, dan Agama 23, no.1, (2017).

Semendawai, Abdul Haris. Memahami Whistleblower. Jakarta, Lembaga Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban, 2011.

Seno Adji, Indrianto, KUHAP dalam Prospektif, Diadit Media, Jakarta, 2011.

Soetandyo, Critical Theory, Critical Legal Theory, dan Critical Legal Studies, Lecture Material on the Doctor of Law program. Semarang: UNDIP, 2003.

Stith, Kate. “Introduction: Wherefor The Privilege?”. Cardozo Law Riview 30, no. 3, (2008-2009).

Sumitro Sumitro. “Implementasi Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia,” Lex Et Societatis 6, no. 1 (April 18, 2018): 21-28.

Tak, P J P. “Deals With Criminals: Supergrasses, Crown Witnesses and Pentiti”, European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 5, no. 1, (1997): 2-26.

Tak, P. J. P. The Dutch Criminal Justice System. (The Netherlands : aolf Legal Publishers CB Nijmegen, 2008.

Tak, P. J. P. De Kroongetuige En de Georganiseerde Misdaad, S Gounda Quint –D .Brouwer en Zoon, Arnhem, 1994.

United States v. Awan, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12084 (2d Cir. N.Y. June 14, 2010).http://witnesses.uslegal.com/corroboration/, accessed on June 10, 2020.

Verhaa, J. W. M. Asas-Asas Linguistik Umum. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press, 1996.